DOGE Was A Giant Failure, Part Infinity ⁠34%

By Red Painter⁠48%

8/8/2026, 5:25:37 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 27 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Emotion, and Appeal to Authority, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 39% saturation with 206 hits. Analysis detected 1,376 faulty-reasoning hits from 528 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 34.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠34% (20,517 of 30,665 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 66.90% of the article peer group.

DOGE was a giant scam perpetrated on the American people. 
It was presented as a major cost-saving initiative. 
It was really a data mining scam where unknowing Americans had all of their confidential data copied and saved to Elon Musk's DOGE team, to be used or sold or manipulated in - so far - unknown ways. 
A government watchdog released an incredible report looking back on the work that DOGE did - and did not - do. 
To say that the findings were shocking would be an understatement 
The Washington Post reports that DOGE "consistently overstated its savings in online posts, taking credit for lease cancellations initiated before the group existed... 
DOGE also claimed contracts were terminated that had not been and loaded its database with savings that could not be verified, the report said." 
The audit spanned the period of June 2025 through the end of July 2026, so roughly 14 months. 
The GAO examined claims of savings that DOGE made after it bulldozed through federal agencies. 
The audit was conducted at the request of Democratic Senators Gary Peters and Richard Blumenthal. 
Elon Musk and his team of fresh-out-of-high-school incel techbros claimed to have cut around $2 trillion in federal spending. 
That was a lie. 
A website created BY DOGE tallying their cuts, called a "wall of receipts", stated that they saved $215 billion. 
Even by their math, that is a HUGE difference. 
GAO looked at about half of those savings and found numerous deficiencies, including: 
Their “Wall of Receipts” “includes leases identified for termination before [the group] was established.” 
In total, 108 of the 264 leases DOGE identified on their own website “were already in process for termination”. 
So, not saving a penny. 
DOGE claimed to have terminated 13,476 contracts. 
GAO showed that 2,000 of those were, in fact, NOT terminated. 
DOGE reported saving $61 billion in contracts. 
The GAO found that more than half the funds — nearly $35 billion — "were either not terminated or unable to be corroborated by the investigators, because DOGE’s data was not specific enough to identify it." 
Oops. 
Sloppy data analysis and paperwork will do you in every time! 
DOGE claimed $27.4 billion in savings related to contract cancellations were from contracts that were not actually terminated! 
GAO reported, “in these cases, another action, such as reducing the contract value or deobligating some funds could have occurred.” 
Again, fuzzy math and putting things in the wrong column. 
GAO concluded that "we found that DOGE did not accurately report actions taken on contracts." 
Neither Elon Musk nor the White House responded to requests for comment from the Washington Post. 
Senator Peters put out a statement saying: “Elon Musk and the Trump administration claimed billions of dollars in savings it could not substantiate, took credit for work already underway, and refused to show its work, all while putting Americans’ sensitive data at risk and hollowing out critical agencies." 
In closing: DOGE promised huge savings. 
They lied. 
They didn't deliver anything they promised. 
Their cuts, especially to USAID, caused the preventable deaths of innocent children. 
This is the legacy of DOGE - DEATH OF CHILDREN. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 19.1%Red Painter: 3.5%Crooks and Liars: 7.0%Confirmation Bias19.1%This article: 2.8%Red Painter: 0.5%Crooks and Liars: 0.8%Anchoring Bias2.8%This article: 13.1%Red Painter: 3.1%Crooks and Liars: 2.7%Availability Heuristic13.1%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.7%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 1.3%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.7%Hindsight Bias1.3%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 2.7%Red Painter: 2.3%Crooks and Liars: 7.9%Framing Effect2.7%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.1%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.1%Crooks and Liars: 0.9%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 3.6%Red Painter: 1.4%Crooks and Liars: 1.8%Pessimism Bias3.6%This article: 36.4%Red Painter: 10.6%Crooks and Liars: 19.5%Negativity Bias36.4%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 8.7%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 2.3%Fundamental Attribution Error8.7%This article: 2.8%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias2.8%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 1.1%Crooks and Liars: 2.5%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.2%Crooks and Liars: 2.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 1.0%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 1.2%Crooks and Liars: 2.9%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 1.2%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 4.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.3%Primacy Effect4.0%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 5.5%Red Painter: 1.7%Crooks and Liars: 10.9%Ad Hominem5.5%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 2.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 22.5%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 2.7%Appeal to Authority22.5%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.6%Crooks and Liars: 1.7%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 1.9%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.7%Slippery Slope1.9%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 3.0%Red Painter: 6.7%Crooks and Liars: 9.8%Hasty Generalization3.0%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.9%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.6%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 26.1%Red Painter: 8.1%Crooks and Liars: 9.0%Appeal to Emotion26.1%This article: 6.3%Red Painter: 0.5%Crooks and Liars: 1.3%Begging the Question6.3%This article: 2.3%Red Painter: 0.7%Crooks and Liars: 1.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)2.3%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 1.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 5.3%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 1.5%Burden of Proof5.3%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.0%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.2%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 2.2%Anecdotal0.2%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.3%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 9.1%Red Painter: 0.2%Crooks and Liars: 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)9.1%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 1.9%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.3%Personal Incredulity1.9%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.5%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 7.2%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy7.2%This article: 7.0%Red Painter: 0.6%Crooks and Liars: 3.8%Unattributed Quote7.0%This article: 1.9%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 1.5%Quote-first Misdirection1.9%This article: 39.0%Red Painter: 16.1%Crooks and Liars: 25.5%Biased Writer Voice39.0%This article: 11.4%Red Painter: 2.2%Crooks and Liars: 2.0%Indoctrination11.4%This article: 15.5%Red Painter: 5.6%Crooks and Liars: 11.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias15.5%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.8%Crooks and Liars: 1.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Red Painter: 0.0%Crooks and Liars: 0.5%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

528 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers51%attributed speech258writer words
Selected voice

Senator Gary Peters

100%flagged-word coverage
48 attributed words18% of attributed speech86% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Politically Left Leaning B+86.8 ptsWriter: 13.2%Senator Gary Peters: 100.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-79.8 ptsWriter: 79.8%Senator Gary Peters: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination-23.3 ptsWriter: 23.3%Senator Gary Peters: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-3.9 ptsWriter: 3.9%Senator Gary Peters: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.